Skip to content
Name: In re P.L. (2024) 100 Cal.App.5th 406
Case #: D082723, D082853
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 02/08/2024
Subsequent History: Ordered published 4/7/2024
Summary

The juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the minors to refuse visitation where Father never requested a change to the visitation orders. The minors were removed due to physical abuse by Father and placed with Mother. Although the court ordered supervised visitation with Father, neither minor wished to visit, and the court ordered that their wishes should be considered. Father did not object to the visitation orders. Father appealed from the jurisdiction and disposition orders and the reviewing court affirmed. Father argued that allowing the minors to refuse visitation was an improper delegation of power. The reviewing court found that the issue was forfeited for the failure to raise it below. Further, even if the issue had not been forfeited, the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the children to decide if they wanted to visit with Father because when a child refuses visitation, it is the parent’s burden to request a specific type of enforcement. It is not the court’s burden to sua sponte find a solution to a child’s refusal to visit.